The amendment affects only some policyholders, but it is an important measure. Sen. Landrieu, who has been working on a more comprehensive flood insurance solution, is in a good position to champion the Cassidy amendment as chair of the Senate Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee.

The new flood maps are problematic in some communities because FEMA didn't take into consideration local or private levees that provide flood protection. In addition, Congress ended grandfathered rates for property that has its risk designation changed to "below base flood elevation."

Some homes now in line for huge rate increases have never flooded -- not even in Hurricane Katrina. That is a good indication FEMA's maps are flawed.

During a May meeting with parish officials from South Louisiana, the head of the flood-insurance program agreed to redo maps to give communities credit for locally built levees. That should lower flood-insurance costs in those areas, but it is unclear how quickly that might occur.

Meanwhile, some homeowners are facing huge increases. One Louisiana homeowner who had been paying $365 per year, for example, is now expected to pay $28,000. That is nonsensical.

Homeowners and businesses all along the U.S. coastline or on inland rivers eventually will feel the pain of higher rates. Congress passed the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act last year to phase out federal subsidies and make the flood-insurance program self-sustaining. But the question of whether policyholders could afford coverage wasn't part of the calculation.

That was a mistake, and it needs to be remedied.

The Cassidy amendment would put the brakes on higher bills for some homeowners, and the Senate should approve it. Then Congress needs to start over and come up with a flood insurance plan that people can actually afford.